All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Chuck Lever" <cel@kernel.org>
To: "Hannes Reinecke" <hare@suse.de>,
	"Christian Brauner" <brauner@kernel.org>
Cc: keyrings@vger.kernel.org, kernel-tls-handshake@lists.linux.dev,
	netdev@vger.kernel.org, "Trond Myklebust" <trondmy@kernel.org>,
	"Anna Schumaker" <anna@kernel.org>,
	"Christoph Hellwig" <hch@lst.de>,
	"David Howells" <dhowells@redhat.com>,
	"Jarkko Sakkinen" <jarkko@kernel.org>,
	"Sagi Grimberg" <sagi@grimberg.me>,
	linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC] NFS: named client identities for mTLS mounts and a per-namespace .nfs keyring
Date: Fri, 11 Sep 2026 15:20:13 -0400	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <4ff29ed1-e963-4010-a7a1-73b229cc8bd0@app.fastmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <bb9a872a-d4aa-467a-b4c9-7bca174a6bbc@suse.de>

Christian, we're interested in the question below about user-ns
versus net-ns for keyring ownership.


On Tue, Jun 2, 2026, at 9:39 PM, Hannes Reinecke wrote:
> On 6/2/26 17:47, Chuck Lever wrote:
>> Today, exactly one x.509 certificate and private key pair can be
>> used at a time for all NFS mounts. The location of that pair is
>> set in /etc/tlshd/config.
>> 
>> We currently have an awkward experimental mechanism for specifying
>> an alternative x.509 certificate and private key for an xprtsec=mtls
>> NFS mount, but it needs to be completed so it can be documented and
>> advertised for use.
>> 
>> I asked Claude to write a rough draft of a design document that
>> outlines what needs to be done to finish the work. I would like
>> input on the kernel-side mechanism in particular for the
>> per-network-namespace keyring and the way userspace reaches it.
>> 
>> 
>> Problem
>> =======
>> 
>> NFS mutual-TLS mounts (xprtsec=mtls) need the client to present an
>> x.509 certificate and prove possession of its private key. The
>> handshake runs in userspace in tlshd; the kernel hands tlshd the
>> credentials by keyring serial number over the handshake genetlink
>> upcall.
>> 
>> The only front end today is two undocumented integer mount options:
>> 
>>      mount -o xprtsec=mtls,cert_serial=723847,privkey_serial=723848 \
>>            server:/export /mnt
>> 
>> The administrator must load the cert and key into the keyring out of
>> band, discover the integer serials, and paste them onto the command
>> line. Serials are opaque, non-reproducible across boots, and easy to
>> transpose. There is also no isolation: nfs_tls_key_verify() does a
>> global key_lookup() on the serial, and the .nfs keyring created in
>> fs/nfs/inode.c is module-global and never referenced again -- any tlshd
>> that learns a serial can read the key.
>> 
>> This RFC proposes a named, per-mount client-identity interface backed
>> by a provisioning CLI, and fixes the keyring to isolate credentials per
>> network namespace. The kernel handshake ABI (integer serials over
>> genetlink) does not change.
>> 
>> 
>> The cross-subsystem ask: a per-netns .nfs keyring
>> =================================================
>> 
>> Network namespace is the correct isolation domain. tlshd is bound to a
>> network namespace, not a user namespace: it services sockets passed up
>> from the kernel over the per-netns handshake genetlink socket, and one
>> tlshd runs per network namespace that needs TLS-protected mounts.
>> 
>>    - Replace the dead module-global .nfs keyring with one keyring per
>>      network namespace, held in struct nfs_net (fs/nfs/netns.h) and
>>      allocated at nfs_net_init(). The keys subsystem otherwise
>>      namespaces on user_namespace, so this is a kernel-held object
>>      referenced from nfs_net (like today's global keyring, but one per
>>      netns). The DNS resolver's per-netns key scoping (net->key_domain,
>>      request_key_net()) is precedent that netns-scoped key handling is
>>      acceptable.
>> 
>>    - tlshd attaches at handshake time, not at launch. This matters: the
>>      keyring may be empty or freshly created when tlshd starts, so
>>      linking it by name at startup is the wrong model. Instead NFS sets
>>      ta_keyring to the netns .nfs keyring serial in
>>      xs_tls_handshake_sync(), the kernel sends it as
>>      HANDSHAKE_A_ACCEPT_KEYRING, and tlshd links that serial into its
>>      session keyring per handshake -- the path tlshd already implements.
>>      Linking grants tlshd possession of the keyring and, through it, of
>>      the possessor-scoped cert and privkey keys.
>> 
>>    - Credential keys are created possessor-readable only (no
>>      KEY_USR_READ). That is what makes isolation enforceable rather
>>      than advisory: a key provisioned in namespace A is absent from B's
>>      keyring and unreadable by B's tlshd even if its serial leaks.
>> 
>> Open question, and where I most want input: userspace -- the
>> provisioning CLI and mount.nfs -- needs to name the kernel-held netns
>> keyring in order to add and search keys. Candidates, modeled on
>> KEYCTL_GET_PERSISTENT (security/keys/persistent.c):
>> 
>>    (a) a new keyctl command that links the caller's netns .nfs keyring
>>        into a destination keyring and returns its serial;
>>    (b) an NFS-specific request_key key type the module instantiates to
>>        point at the netns keyring;
>>    (c) a per-netns serial exported via procfs or netlink.
>> 
>> The per-netns keyring decision itself I consider settled; the retrieval
>> primitive is the open one. There is also a user_namespace accounting
>> nuance: keys added by userspace are quota-charged against a key_user
>> keyed by user_namespace even though the keyring lives in nfs_net. I
>> would like the keyrings folks to confirm the quota and ownership
>> interaction is sane when the user_ns and net_ns boundaries do not
>> coincide.
>>
>
> I am all for making keyrings namespace-aware. Logically I _think_ they
> should be tagged per user-namespace, as this really is about the 
> filesystem (and as such would warrant to be tagged per mount ns).
> Tagging it per net-namespace is not a great fit (well, for me, at 
> least), as also block devices might require keys to present the
> bdev (eg nvme authentication)
>
> I might be okay to have it tagged per net-namespace, though, as all
> current users are in some shape or form being network related.
> But I'm not sure if that stays that way, so I am worried if we're
> not restricting ourselves to much by that choice.
> As really, the question is: what is the driving the namespace selection?
> Is it the _requesting_ layer, ie the layer issuing the mount() call?
> Or is it the _providing_ layer, ie the layer providing the 
> devices/interfaces where the mount() call is operating on?
> If it's the former, then we need to tag is as
> net-namespace. If it's the latter, then we need to tag it as a
> user-namespace / mount-ns.
>
> We should probably ask Christian ...
>
> Cheers,
>
> Hannes
> -- 
> Dr. Hannes Reinecke                  Kernel Storage Architect
> hare@suse.de                                +49 911 74053 688
> SUSE Software Solutions GmbH, Frankenstr. 146, 90461 Nürnberg
> HRB 36809 (AG Nürnberg), GF: I. Totev, A. McDonald, W. Knoblich

-- 
Chuck Lever (Come to NFS bake-a-thon! https://nfsv4bat.org)

  parent reply	other threads:[~2026-09-11 19:20 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2026-06-02 15:47 [RFC] NFS: named client identities for mTLS mounts and a per-namespace .nfs keyring Chuck Lever
2026-06-03  1:39 ` Hannes Reinecke
2026-06-03 14:27   ` Chuck Lever
2026-06-05 21:32     ` Sagi Grimberg
2026-06-05 22:07       ` Chuck Lever
2026-09-11 19:20   ` Chuck Lever [this message]
2026-06-05 21:44 ` Sagi Grimberg
2026-06-06  6:50   ` Hannes Reinecke
2026-09-13 16:05 ` Chuck Lever
2026-09-15 20:35   ` Chuck Lever

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=4ff29ed1-e963-4010-a7a1-73b229cc8bd0@app.fastmail.com \
    --to=cel@kernel.org \
    --cc=anna@kernel.org \
    --cc=brauner@kernel.org \
    --cc=dhowells@redhat.com \
    --cc=hare@suse.de \
    --cc=hch@lst.de \
    --cc=jarkko@kernel.org \
    --cc=kernel-tls-handshake@lists.linux.dev \
    --cc=keyrings@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=sagi@grimberg.me \
    --cc=trondmy@kernel.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.